Norman Angell, the Great Illusion(IR classic 1)

发布于 2022-02-28  400 次阅读


Norman Angell, the Great Illusion, a study of the relation of military power in nations to their economic and social advantage

background:
the great fraud to religion
anglophobia to britain/nationalism

国际关系学科的创始文本
合作可以获得资源增量、相互依赖(大部分资源的相对价格其实是在不断下降的,而只有人力资源是在上升的),欧洲国家向民主社会转型之前,国内市场是不大的,所以要努力拓展国际市场。(今天的中国某种意义上一样。)
跨国性和国际性的区别
现代世界消解空间的能力

内容:从物质层面论证战争无效性
经济危机传导、领土及财富吞并、战争赔偿、殖民地转移
战争会使战胜国获得大量利益,但无论是现金赔偿还是物质赔偿,都可能冲击国内经济。如果把这个国家变成其殖民地,当时的殖民地是高度自治的,宗主国在与其进行贸易的时候并不有利,所获并不高于防务的成本。英国尚且如此,后发的德国更不可能。

第二种动机是给竞争对手以沉重的打击。安吉尔认为一国生存的要依靠自然资源和人力资源。要么毁灭人口,这在经济高度依赖的情况下,也会摧毁本国的市场。普法战争中,也使得法国拥有了更高的投资回报率,经济快速恢复。

非物质层面论证战争无效性
社会达尔文主义认为战争是社会领域的自然选择。安吉尔从个体主义的角度来看,认为会消耗优秀的个体,剩下的都是老幼妇孺,实际上是反向的排优。

战争是复仇和发泄民族仇恨的重要手段
首先要分清敌我,敌人、他者是构建的概念,国与国之间不存在根本的矛盾。民族认同逐渐会被跨国认同所取代,类似当时的社会主义国家和资本主义国家的抱团互助。'in these two classes preciesly the same attitude of internationalization.'布尔什维克当时是有很强的国际视野的,列宁是世界主义者,相信民族自决,但由于国内斗争,斯大林变得不一样了。(现在我们认为民族自决会分裂已有的国家,是trouble maker)威尔逊等人也是世界主义者。这就是为什么安吉尔这样说。

why war?
战略误判的原因在于?
martin ceadel: 忽视了国家理性的问题,一个国家的意志本身不总是理性的结果。加上安吉尔是和平主义者,但在政策领域上是亲防务的,不支持军事力量的削减,使得其政策建议拥有一定的模糊性。

但一战的结果一定程度上也证明了安吉尔的正确
收益很大一部分抵消了战争损失,协约国得到的净利润是有限的。
而战败国开始了新一轮经济增长周期。

很多人说安吉尔是理想主义者,但这个评判可能是不那么公平的。

美西战争(1898 patriotism under three flags)、德雷夫斯事件(1894-1906 法国当时要抓间谍,认为德雷夫斯是间谍,但后来发现可能是误判。反犹主义者认为坚持对他定罪,另一派认为要翻案,造成了法国社会的分裂。这件事情让安吉尔发现人的一些观念是根深蒂固的)、布尔战争(1880-1881;1899-1902 布尔人:荷兰裔的白人,当时在南非建立了两个公国,英国与其进行战争。欧洲的陆军是贵族发展而来的,所以很多王室会参军。这让安吉尔发现战争的消耗性)

当时社会达尔文主义和种族主义是很时髦的

思考题:反观今天中国和美国

·由于分工,战争的代价巨大 the economics of the case: war did not pay
During the second half of the 19th century, the industrial states of the world went through an evolution that made them dependent on each other for trade and finance. War among the great powers would cause this network of interdependence to
unravel, and bring the entire economic system down

·he argues that the Germans have nothing to gain from an attack of England.
they would unleash a deep economic crisis in both countries and undermine Germany's as well as UK's prosperity and power.
英国是以贸易立国的,它是藏富于民的,不像西班牙葡萄园一样藏很多黄金在某一个具体的地方。

·language shapes our perception of the world:
if people were provided with a new vocabulary better able to capture the realities of and interdependence world, then they would also more easily understand and adapt to the politics realities of that world.
贵族热衷于战争,这也影响了语言。因此要改变语言。
TGI的核心概念: Interdependence, adaption, the language of politics

中国的国际关系本能很多也是从列强那学来的。我们看到的是弱肉强食的世界,因此我们现在也很强调斗争。西方热衷的human rights我们是不太相信的,我们更相信的是坚船利炮、落后就要挨打etc.
国家也具有世界观的。
这句话放到今天也还是make sense的。

angell's(TGI) central concepts: interdependence, adaption(外交理念要与世界发展的现状相符), the language of politics

people were attracted to angell's argument because it distanced itself from the religions reasoning and pacifism that had traditionallly dominated the world.
以前人们对和平的认可大多数来源于宗教教义,安吉尔第一次从社会科学的理性角度论证战争的不合理性。

· TGL was not a moralist tract, but an appeal to common sense and scientific argument.
reason:
first, productive capital has become international.
second, there is no longer an obvious connection between a countrie's power and wealth.
特别提到北欧国家令人羡慕的生存状态

the human nature of the case:人性论似乎是‘你说什么就是什么的状态’,为什么安吉尔和启蒙运动以后的学者一直在讨论人性?
the leader of the great power cling to an obsolete view of power politics, which was sustained by three key ideas:
human beings are not fully rational;
human nature is constant;
human existance is a struggle in which only the fittest survive.

Angell's view:
to reason 1: yes, human beings are not fully rational,
2: no, angell maintains an optimistic view of human nature.
mankind learns over time. in the long run only 人性只有在长时段才会改变
3: not exactlly, the best guarantee of a nation's survival is no longer millitary strength
"the wealth, prosperity, and well-being of a nation depend in no way upon its political power."
rather, prosperity and well-being depend on the nation's aility to adapt to changing circumstances.
适者生存的“适者”不是由武力define的,而是由适应能力决定的

adaptation:
man's irresistible drift away from conflict and towards co-operation is but(仅仅) the complete adaptation of the organism(man) to its enviornment(the plante, nature). 全球和平合作是最大的理性,是终极的适应

in the distant past, war might have served some purpose of group cohesion or the acquisition of land and loot. however, in the age of industrialism and inderpendence, sonquest and war are destructive activicities for the human species.

the establishment of organizations and institutions for solidarity and cooperation, by constrast, are constructive.

criticism:
E.H,Carr's appraisal:
Angell is the last surviving exponent of the utopian view that the war was simply a “failurof understanding” and that education would lead to peace.

teacher's opinion:
Although the industrial states clearly grew more interdependent during the final quarter of the 19th century, this growth did not continue into the 20th.
Angell was a journalist and a peace activist who worked the public sphere. He read and wrote for newspapers and popular journals and did not really connect with the growing academic IR community.
Angell lacked the time, the patience and the scholarly tools to develop careful theoretical arguments.
He invariably drew on newspapers rather than academic books and scholarly journals, and omitted contemporary economist and lawyers who discuss interdependence,e.g. Ivan Bloch.

Only during the 1970s did the world began to rebuild the global webs of interaction. Only during the 1970s did the world regain an international transaction density that approached pre-world war I levels.
When it did, the interdependence argument resurfaced in IR scholarship.

misunderstanding: the war is now impossible
Angell's real argument: if the statesmen of the west did not change their ways-if they did not come round to a more sensible view of international affairs-costly wars would errupt.

所以一战和二战可能恰恰说明了angell的观念是正确的

a footnote to angell:
迈克尔·波特:《态度、价值观、信念以及繁荣的微观经济学》,p. 62
100年前,甚至是50年前,人们曾广泛认为,国家繁荣与否,来源于该国是否拥有土地、矿产等方面的自然资源以及充足的劳动力后备,从而比那些资源较少的国家占有比较优势。然而,在现代全球经济中,企业可以廉价地和有效地从任何地方获取资源,这就使资源本身的价值不那么高了。资源的实际价值在下降,过去百年来一些基本商品的实际价格逐渐降低,就证明了这一点。

背景:个人背景、历史背景、学术背景
内容:理论和经验研究;
分析:内容核心要点总结、结合背景和内容
回顾:争议和回顾;